Farm bill’s failure

The surprising defeat of the farm bill last week highlighted, once again, the deep divisions within the House of Representatives, as well as the partisan divide on Capitol Hill. The fault lines lie not...

Comment

Posted Jun. 27, 2013 @ 12:01 am

The surprising defeat of the farm bill last week highlighted, once again, the deep divisions within the House of Representatives, as well as the partisan divide on Capitol Hill. The fault lines lie not just between Republicans and Democrats however; they cut straight through the Republican Party.

The House farm bill would have hiked 10-year spending by some 47 percent over the 2008 farm bill ($940 billion vs. $640 billion). About 80 percent of that nearly $1 trillion was to fund food stamps, whose cost has quadrupled over the last 10 years, to $80 billion a year. For about one-quarter of House Republicans, that was too much.

Speaker John Boehner was unable to persuade enough of them to go along with a $2 billion annual cut in food stamps. Many House Democrats, meanwhile, found the cut unconscionably deep, warning that some 2 million people would lose benefits.

The vote was 234 to 195, with 62 rebellious Republicans joining the majority of Democrats in voting against the bill.

Renewed roughly every five years, the farm bill has traditionally won bipartisan approval. Since the 1960s, its combining of agriculture programs with food stamps ensured that rural interests would receive plenty of urban-state support. The more recent election of members who pledged to restrain Washington’s spending have changed the political calculus, though.

To offset their resistance, Mr. Boehner tried to woo moderate Democrats. But several turned against the bill because of Republican-passed amendments. These included stringent new work requirements for food-stamp recipients, and permission for states to add drug testing to the program, now known as the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP). Other Democrats defected over a proposed overhaul of the dairy price-support program.

It now looks doubtful that the House can pass a bill by its Sept. 30 deadline. Instead, it will probably approve an extension of the existing program. Unfortunately, that would leave in place a wasteful system of direct payments to farmers costing $5 billion a year.

The Democrat-run Senate has passed a measure that, while not perfect, would begin reforming the system. While it calls for reduced SNAP expenditures, its cuts of $400 million a year are not nearly as sharp as those proposed by the House.

If he could afford politically to offend his caucus, Mr. Boehner could try again by putting forth a measure closer to the Senate’s, hoping to draw in more Democratic votes. We wish him luck.

We can understand why some Republicans want to restrain deficit spending. But it is important that all who need food stamps receive help. Ultimately, the best way to cut spending on food stamps would be by getting more people working in a more vigorous economy.